Interesting case, with Rule 19 a major player.
Here is the opening brief in El Dorado/Diamond Springs Fire Protection District v. El Dorado Fire Protection District (Cal. App. 3rd Dist.): Diamond Springs Opening Brief.
The agreement involves the Shingle Springs Band of Miwok Indians.
Here is that court’s opinion in Armijo v. Pueblo of Laguna. An excerpt:
The Pueblo of Laguna (the Pueblo) appeals the order of the district court denying the Pueblo’s motion to dismiss the cross-claims of Appellee Robert Armijo (Armijo) filed in a quiet title suit. Our resolution of this appeal requires us to consider the issue of tribal sovereign immunity as it relates to non-tribal land purchased by the Pueblo and whether the Pueblo is an indispensable party. We hold that the Pueblo is immune from suit under the doctrine of tribal sovereign immunity and, further, that the Pueblo is an indispensable party who cannot be joined. Accordingly, we reverse the order of the district court and remand for dismissal of Armijo’s cross-claims.
Interestingly, this case was decided Oct. 6, right before the Supreme Court granted cert in Madison County v. Oneida Indian Nation.
Looks like an interesting case — whether a tribe is liable for violating the Fair Labor Standards Act in allegedly failing to properly pay overtime wages in a TANF program run by the tribal government (the answer is no).
Here are the materials in Noriega v. Torres Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indian Tribe (C.D. Cal.):
DCT Order to Dismiss Noriega Complaint
Interesting decision, in that the court found the private plaintiff could avoid California’s Eleventh Amendment immunity, but dismissed anyway for a lack of a cause of action in IGRA to sue over gaming compacts.
Here are the materials in Friends of Amador County v. Salazar (E.D. Cal.):
We reported several days ago about the tribal immunity case, Seneca Telephone v. Miami Tribe (Okla. Civ. App.). Here are the materials we’ve been able to gather so far:
Update (1/18): Miami Tribe Brief in Chief
Since the United States offered no amicus brief on the question, there is the possibility of a CVSG as well.
From SCOTUSblog:
Madison County v. Oneida Indian Nation
Docket: 10-72
Issue(s): (1) Whether tribal sovereign immunity from suit bars taxing authorities from foreclosing to collect lawfully imposed property taxes; and (2) whether the ancient Oneida reservation in New York was disestablished or diminished.
Here are the materials in Muhammad v. Comanche Nation Casino (W.D. Okla.):
DCT Order Denying Muhammad Motion to Remand
Muhammad Response to Motion to Dismiss
Comanche Reply re Motion to Dismiss
Troubling reasoning, in that the court seems to be saying that since tribes have no tradition of regulating telecommunications, they cannot have immunity.
Here is the case, captioned Seneca Telephone Co. v. Miami Tribe: seneca telephone.
Miigwetch to J.R.
Turtle Talk 
You must be logged in to post a comment.